Polar FT7 HRM vs Link Bodymedia Armband, little help? :)

OMGeeeHorses

Alright, I read into all the other things people had posted with the same title on MFP. None of them answered my question, as the person was just wondering and did not own the product already...anyways!!

I bought a Polar FT7 HRM (heart rate monitor), I really just bought it to show me where I had my heart rate beating at when I did intense workouts ( or workouts in general) I roughly keep my intensity around 170-187 bpm (brisk break walk/jogging). The information that I received at the end of my workout was 121 minutes and burned 1,052. Sounds legit.

But then when I take a look at my Bodymedia Link (around same time) it only logs me at 94 minutes and a burn of 812. Which isn't that huge of a number difference. Only thing that has me confused is that it gave me a lower minute usage and obviously a lower burn amount.

Can anyone explain this to me? I have had my Bodymedia for about 1 1/2 years now (started with core and upgraded to LINK) and just got my HRM about 4 days ago. Just alone using the Bodymedia, I have lost weight. So I mean its accurate to some degree...I guess my number ONE question is...

What would you see as more accurate? (both come back with 80-85% accuracy...one even saying 95% for HRM..but I don't know that's why I am asking this question!!)

Anyways thanks for reading and answering!!

SpecialKH

I have the link. I'm looking for a Garmin HR monitor so they can interface. But meanwhile, I would say if you are only a jogging and slightly out of breath, that is probably accurate. At 46 and a HR of 165 for about 20 minutes, it would seem that I should be burning more calories because it feels like I'm busting my hump. But in reality, I've been doing this long enough that my body is starting to get more efficient which means even tho most charts will tell you that 165 should hit V02 levels, it really doesn't. I'm out of breath but I can drop to 145 range and breathe through my nose when someone my age should be hitting V02 levels or at least zone 4. I'm obviously pretty solidly in zone 3. And Body Media seems to know that.

I figured just to be sure since I can't really tell how accurate the HR monitor on the elliptical at the gym really is, (and who can take their pulse while going 6mph) I am going to get a Garmin HR monitor which should sync with the Link for the utmost accuracy.

However, I should also add that, based on my intake and output (caloric-ally) - and I'm very accurate and religious about reporting everything that passes my lips - I should be losing faster than I am, so I think BodyMedia is much more accurate than either the elliptical (when I plug in the calories burned from the machine - usually around 300 calories for 30 minutes) or MFP (which tells me over 400 if I just add 30 minutes of elliptical) because in reality I cannot be burning nearly as much as either say or I'd be dropping a steady 2 pounds a week with a deficit of nearly 1000 calories per day using those figures.

So I'm not sure if I answered your question but rather sharing my experience that tells me my calorie output is not nearly what all of the other devices say it is and Body Media being the most conservative seems to be the most accurate.